Table 2.

Effects of Common Positive and Negative Dyadic Coping on Patients' and Partners' Cancer-Related Distress and Dyadic Adjustment

	Cancer-related distress (IES)				Dyadic adjustment (DAS-7)
	B	SE	t	Effect size (r)	B	SE	t	Effect size (r)
Common positive dyadic coping
Intercept	19.44	.71			25.03	.24
Length of marriage	−.11	.06	−2.00*	.15	.01	.02	.35
Own cancer-related stress communication	−.44	.62	−.71		.09	.21	.41
Perceived partner supportive coping	−.02	.69	−.03		.55	.24	2.27*	.08
Perceived partner unsupportive coping	3.33	.76	4.40**	.16	−1.16	.26	−4.41**	.16
Social rolea	1.32	.59	2.25*	.15	−.31	.17	−1.79
Common positive dyadic coping	.11	.66	.16		2.10	.23	9.27**	.32
Common positive dyadic coping × social role	−.91	.45	−2.03*	.09	.16	.14	1.10
Common negative dyadic coping
Intercept	19.43	.69			25.04	.27
Length of marriage	−.11	.05	−1.98*	.15	−.01	.02	−.27
Own cancer-related stress communication	−.24	.60	−.40		.55	.21	2.58*	.10
Perceived partner supportive coping	.23	.64	.36		1.23	.23	5.29**	.20
Perceived partner unsupportive coping	2.18	.78	2.79**	.10	−1.21	.29	−4.26**	.16
Social rolea	1.23	.57	2.15*	.14	−.58	.18	−3.20**	.22
Common negative dyadic coping	2.16	.46	4.69**	.17	−.71	.17	−4.21**	.16
Common negative dyadic coping × social role	.78	.39	1.98*	.08	−.11	.14	−.78

Note. B = raw coefficient; SE = standard error; effect size $r=\sqrt{t^2∕(t^2+\mathit{df})}$.

^*p < .05.

^**p < .01.

^aEffect coding was used for social role such that 1 = patient and −1 = partner.